<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (1) TMI 110 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52634</link>
    <description>Clandestine removal of quartz clock movements was alleged on the basis of inflated wastage of enamelled copper wire and plastic scrap, but the demand was not supported by reliable corroborative evidence. The Tribunal noted that comparisons with other units and competitor statements were insufficient without examining material manufacturing factors such as wire breakage, technology changes, imported inputs, and correlation with Modvat records. It also treated the denial of cross-examination, unconvincing allegations about fictitious scrap buyers, and evidence of genuine cheque-based sales as weakening the department&#039;s case. The plastic scrap explanation was supported by the job worker&#039;s statement, and an isolated stock incident did not prove a continuing pattern. Duty, penalties, and interest could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 09:57:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91111" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 110 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52634</link>
      <description>Clandestine removal of quartz clock movements was alleged on the basis of inflated wastage of enamelled copper wire and plastic scrap, but the demand was not supported by reliable corroborative evidence. The Tribunal noted that comparisons with other units and competitor statements were insufficient without examining material manufacturing factors such as wire breakage, technology changes, imported inputs, and correlation with Modvat records. It also treated the denial of cross-examination, unconvincing allegations about fictitious scrap buyers, and evidence of genuine cheque-based sales as weakening the department&#039;s case. The plastic scrap explanation was supported by the job worker&#039;s statement, and an isolated stock incident did not prove a continuing pattern. Duty, penalties, and interest could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52634</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>